Why are some countries rich and others poor?...Why are some countries rich and others poor? The Industrial Revolution and the Rise of the West. Bob Allen Professor of Economic History

Why are some countries rich and others poor?

The Industrial Revolution and the Rise of the West.

Bob AllenProfessor of Economic History

Oxford University

Graham Lecture, 2008

Since 1500, incomes have risen in most of the world, however:

• Incomes have risen fastest in the countries that were richer in 1500

• Consequently, world inequality is much greater today than in 1500

• In 1500, average income in the UK was only 30% higher than in India

• Today, the average UK income is ten times that in India.

The graph shows when the West got rich.

0

5000

10000

15000

20000

25000

1500 1600 1700 1800 1900 2000UK Italy China India Japan

GDP per head1990 US$’s

GDP per head, 1990US$’s1500 1820 1913 2000

UK 714 1707 4921 19818

Italy 1100 1117 2564 18740

USA 400 1257 5301 28129

Canada 400 904 4447 22198

China 600 600 552 3425

India 550 533 673 1910

Japan 500 669 1387 21069

Distribution of global manufacturing

Source: Crafts and Venables (2003, p. 327)

The Big Question is: Why are some nations rich and others poor?

• Technological change is the fundamental cause of economic growth

• Other changes—urbanization, rising incomes, capital accumulation are results of more efficient production

• The Rise of the West, therefore, comes down to the invention and utilization of labour saving technology.

Why was Arkwright’s water frame applied on a mass scale in Britain?

While this machine was little used and then abandoned in China

and Vaucanson’s automated loom was ignored in eighteenth century France?

Five classic answers explain the Rise of the West

• Geography: did the natural world favour the West?• Political institutions: Did limited government foster

commerce and thereby the rise of the West?• Demography: Did different patterns of marriage and

fertility give the West its lead?• Culture: Was the West more ‘rational’ than the Rest?• Science: Did the scientific revolution of the 17th

century cause the industrial revolution of the 18th?

1. Geography favoured the winners:

• Coal was a corner stone of the Industrial Revolution

• Abundant land and resources led the USA to invent labour saving technology

• Do the tropics suffer from malaria and the tse-tse fly?

2. Limited Government• ‘Good’ institutions include

– Limited government– Low taxes– Secure property rights

• They create a broad market and a ‘favourable climate for investment.’

• These were secured in England by the Glorious Revolution of 1688 (parliamentary supremacy)

• The rest of the world was cursed with despotism.

The trouble is that parliamentary ascendancy meant that

• Britain had higher taxes than France• Britain was more successful than France in seizing an

empire.• British property was more vulnerable than French

property (witness the sorry story of irrigation in France versus improvement in England).

• “despotic power [which] was only available intermittently before 1688…was always available thereafter” (Hoppit 1996, p. 126)

3. demography

• Western Europeans had late marriages and not everyone married.

• Rest of the world had early and universal marriage– The difference arose in the late middle ages when the

chance to earn high wages created ‘Girl Power’ and women could say no to undesired husbands.

• The result was persistently higher incomes in West that led to more savings and investment in education.

• In rest of the World population growth always defeated economic development and produced grinding poverty.

4. culture

• Weber thesis: protestant reformation led to rational pursuit of gain and high rate of saving

• Economic growth required replacement of spiritual view by naturalistic view—the ‘disenchantment of the world’

• Weber thought the West exemplified these values but the Rest did not: true or false?

• Did other cultures have other virtues? E.g. did the Japanese have a useful group solidarity?

Culture changed as ‘human capital’was accumulated.

Proportion of the Adult PopulationThat Could Sign Its Name

1500 1800

England .06 .53

Netherlands .10 .68Belgium .10 .49

Germany .06 .35France .07 .37Austria/Hungary .06 .21Poland .06 .21

Italy .09 .22Spain .09 .20

Correlated rise in numeracy and trade skills

5. Scientific revolution

• Scientific Revolution in the 17th century—Galileo, Newton, Boyle, et al.

• Some discoveries led to technological breakthroughs– Atmosphere has weight and condensing steam creates a

vacuum led to steam engine

• Did culture at large change as science became a model for knowledge and control?

• Needham problem: Why was China overtaken by the West despite early breakthroughs (eg paper, printing, gun powered, compass, etc)? Didn’t China have the same scientific knowledge as the West?

Good institutions, culture, etc. may have been necessary for the Industrial

Revolution, but they were not sufficient.

• Good institutions, etc., increase the supply of inventions.

• What drove the western economies forward were developments that increased the demandfor technology that raised labour productivity.

• This demand for labour saving technology was a result of the creation of a global economy after 1500.

In the rest of the lecture, I consider the supply and demand for technology in

three phases with digressions:

• Why did Britain pioneer labour saving technology in the Industrial Revolution (1760-1830)?– Why not in East Asia?

• Why did USA further develop labour saving technology and mass production (1850-1920)?– How did some countries catch-up?

• How and why did innovation become science based in the 20th century?– What is the future of the third world?

Phase I: British Industrial Revolution

• It presupposed favourable institutions and culture, but Britain was not unique.

• What set first the Dutch and then the British apart was their great success in the global economy that developed after 1500.

• Success in the global economy created a high wage, cheap energy economy that made it profitable to adopt and invent revolutionary technology that raised labour productivity.

• Notice that this is a self-reinforcing process that leads to economic divergence.

The success of the Dutch and British was based on international trade and increasingly on their empires.

Dutch Empire

British empire

Growth of trade led to:

• Growth of port cities and rural industries– London grew from 50,000 in 1500 to 1 million in

1800 mainly due to trade.– Witney, small town near Oxford, grew because it

was the centre of a workshop industry that made all of the blankets for the Hudson Bay Company

• Growth like this led to tight labour markets and high wages.

Success in the global economy transformed economic structures.

Economic success had a big impact on wages.

0

1

2

3

4

5

6 1

= ba

re b

ones

sub

sist

ence

inco

me

1375 1475 1575 1675 1775 1875

London

Amsterdam

Vienna

Florence

Delhi

Beijing

The Rest Falls Behind Northwest Europein labourers' standard of living

Eighteenth century Britain was unique for labour that was very expensive relative to

capital.

0.5

1

1.5

2

1630 1680 1730 1780

England Strasbourg Vienna

Wage Relative to Price of Capital

The growth of London led to the English coal industry, which gave northern Britain

the cheapest energy in the world.

0

2

4

6

8

10

gram

s of

silv

er p

er m

illio

n B

TUs

Amsterdam

London

Paris

Strasbourg

Newcastle

Beijing

Price of Energyearly 1700s

The Industrial Revolution was the result of the evolution of wages and

energy prices.

• High wages and cheap energy prices created a demand for technology that substituted capital and energy for labour.

• High wages increased the supply of technology by acquiring schooling and skills to meet that challenge.

The famous technologies of the Industrial Revolution like the Steam engine,

The cotton spinning machines,

Iron production with coal.

These were only profitable to use in Britain–not in other countries.

• They increased the use of capital and coal.• These were cheap in Britain but expensive

elsewhere.• Consequently, the new technology was only

profitable to use in Britain.• Even there, it was marginal at the beginning.

Rate of return to buying a spinning jenny for domestic use around 1775.

• England—38%• France—3%• India— -5%• Profitability was high in England because labour

was expensive compared to capital.• Even if French and Indian institutions had been

‘perfect,’ the Industrial Revolution would not have happened there because it would not have paid to mechanize.

Why was the Industrial Revolution invented in Britain?

• ‘Invention is 1% inspiration and 99% perspiration,’ (Thomas Edison)

• In the 18th century, the inspiration was not usually the hard part.

• The key to invention was doing the engineering development to make simple ideas work.

The revolutionary technology was only profitable to invent in Britain.

• All of these inventions entailed R&D costs.– Arkwright, for instance, spent £13,000 to perfect

his cotton inventions.• There was no point going to such expense if

the invention was not going to be used.• The Industrial Revolution was British because

it would not have paid to invent it anywhere else.

• That is why the industrial revolution was British!

The Industrial Revolution did not stay in Britain because British engineers

improved the technology to the point where it was profitable everywhere!

• All inputs were saved—even those that were scarce in Britain.

• Coal consumption per horsepower-hour dropped from 45 lbs in 1727 to 2 lbs. in 1870.

• As a result, the revolutionary technology became profitable to use in the countries where it has not paid previously.

• That’s when the industrial revolution spread to Europe and north America.

0 5

10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50

1727 1757 1787 1817 1847

Newcomen--1/3 Watt

McNaughted Newcomen--1/2

Coal Consumption in Rotary Engineslbs per HP-hour

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

1730 1750 1770 1790 1810 1830 1850

ATC cap coal

Rotary Engine: Costs per HP-HR

Steam engines are an example.

First Digression:

Why didn’t the industrial Revolution happen in East Asia?

Japan in Tokugawa period 1603-1868

• Prima facie example of bad institutions causing stagnation– Division of society into four castes– Country divided into feudal domains– Tokugawa shogun acting in name of emperor had

supreme power and could confiscate domains– Severe limitations on international trade.– Internal tariffs between feudal domains.

However, the economy worked well in many ways.

• In 1700, Japan had three of the ten largest cities in the world.• Much manufacturing in smaller cities and towns.• Large volume of trade and an internal division of labour to

supply cities.• Legal system was adequate to support the trade and production

system.• High level of literacy• Feudal counties competed against each other to promote

economy• Demographic system exhibited preventive check and

restrained population growth.

The Japanese were also inventive. But their inventions led to stagnation.

• In Japan, labour was cheap and energy was expensive.

• As a result, invention was directed to saving energy and using labour.

• This lowered the productivity of labour.• That produces a poverty trap—not economic

growth.

19th century Japanese silk was powered by humans (labour intensive).

Here’s the man turning the crank!

18th century British silk mill was powered by water (capital-intensive).

Japan is an object lesson in what Europe would have been like if its economy had not been stimulated

by the globalisation.

Phase II: The nineteenth century was a re-run of the eighteenth, but the centre of progress shifted

to North America.

• The growth of the American economy in the nineteenth century was based on the exploitation and export of agriculture and resource products—cotton, wheat, minerals—and the successful adoption of British industrial technology.

Slaves loading cotton on a steamboat

The cotton’s destination: an English mill

As a result, the USA became the world’s high wage economy.

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

1755 1775 1795 1815 1835

Massachusetts London

Oxford Florence

The American lead increased in the 19th century.

In response to the high wages, the USA invented an increasingly mechanized

technology that boosted labour productivity.

Output per man-year in blast furnaces

Second Digression

What was happening in the Rest of the World?

Modern technology shifted from the core to the periphery when:

• There was a suitable political environment (peace and reasonable legal system).

• Technology was cost-effective:– Either the technology evolved to become

‘appropriate’.– Or there was sufficient engineering capacity to

adapt the technology to local conditions.

This was true of rich countries as well as poor countries.

• Canada is an example.• It’s growth was initially due to the export of

primary product staples—not dissimilar to the USA—and drew immigrant labour from northern Europe on similar terms.

• So Canada was a high wage economy.• American technology was, therefore, broadly

‘appropriate’.

However, the Canadian tariff made the situation more complicated.

• It encouraged manufacturing production in Canada by raising the price of manufactures including the price of capital goods.

• Canadian factories were not simply copies of American factories—they were reengineered to reflect the high price of capital goods relative to labour.

Canadian manufacturing productivity

• In Canada, labour and raw materials are typically cheaper than in US

• Capital is relatively more expensive in US• In response, Canadian industry uses more

labour and materials relative to capital, so labour and material productivity are low and capital productivity high.

• Over time, Canadian firms invent technologies that accentuate these differences.

Japan was a very different country.

• In 1850, a poor economy with hand technology.• Most international trade was prohibited.• In 1853 and 1854, the American Commodore Perry

and his naval squadron forced Japan to sign ‘friendship’ treaty giving Americans trading rights and extra-territorial justice for citizens.

• Other European powers gained similar concessions.• ‘Unequal treaties’ remained long term irritant.

Commodore Perry landing in Yokohama 14 July 1853.

Upshot was Meiji Restoration in 1868 when modernizers took control of state• Aim: ‘rich country, strong army’• Method: import and adapt western institutions

and technologies• Legal, political, and educational reforms.• Japanese success depended on these national

policies but also on people and local institutions that responded to opportunities.

The Meiji state set up factories with imported technology, but most were

failures.

• The factor proportions were wrong, so they were not cost-effective in Japan.

• To be successful technology had to be re-engineered to match Japanese circumstances.

• The Ministry of the Interior imported English spinning mules in 1879 but they were uniformly unprofitable.

Success in cotton spinning was achieved with the rattling spindle (garabo)

This was targeted industrial policy

• Invented by Gaun Tokimune• An intermediate technology suited to Japanese

conditions.• A local initiative—not a Meiji state policy.• Financed and promoted by Chikuma prefecture

(successor to feudal county industrial promoters)

• Survival of Tokugawa (pre-industrial) state and private organizations was important for industrial success.

Japan was unique:Why didn’t China or India develop?

• They once had indigenous manufacturing capability that might have been a base for development.

• India was colonized and China almost• States were either not interested (India) or too

weak (China) to follow Japan’s route to ‘rich country, strong army’.

British empire did create vast free trade zone and secure property.

• However, free trade destroyed Indian manufacturing.

• ‘The bones of the cotton weavers are bleaching the plains of India.’ (William Bentinck, Gov-General, 1835)

• British policy aimed to develop India’s comparative advantage as an agricultural producer.– Tea growing was promoted– Punjab irrigated

The Chinese Empire did not respond effectively to western imperialism

• Britain defeated China in the Opium Wars (1839-42, 1856-60) that mandated free trade in opium and other commodities.

• China further weakened by Taiping Rebellion (1850-64) and boxer Rebellion (1899-1901).

• Self Strengthening Movement (c. 1861-95) aimed to strengthen military and economy but were ineffective compared to Japan.

• End of Qing dynasty in 1912

Phase III: Growth in 20th century became more science based.

• Electricity, pharmaceuticals, nuclear, electronics, chemicals, etc., rely on scientific discoveries and are mediated with scientific language.

• Nuclear power requires E = mc2 but the spinning jenny did not require F = ma

New institutions become important:

• Industrial research laboratories• Government and university research• Is civilian technology derived from military

technology paid for by governments?

Science based technologies are biased in favour of skilled (educated) labour.

• Manifestly true for research scientists and engineers

• Public and private organizations also required highly educated workers to operate effectively

• Productivity of production personnel is also increased with education.

Skilled biased technical change initially benefited rich countries.

• New technology increases the demand for skilled (educated) labour.

• Advanced countries have large educational systems.

• New technology is ‘inappropriate’ for poor countries.

Third Digression

Prospects for the Third World

Two responses are possible among poor countries.

• Expand the size of their educational systems to close the gap with the rich countries.

• Re-engineer advanced technology to make it more suitable to their factor proportions.

• The problem remains of creating suitable institutions to promote the assimilation of advanced technology.

Percentage of the population in school

Japan Indonesia

1870 2.5% 0.1%

1880 6.7 0.1

1900 10.8 0.4

1913 14.1 1.1

1928 17.5 2.8

1940 19.7 3.4

1950 22.3 7.0

1973 17.2 13.6

1989 18.8 23.9

Education explains part of the gap:

0

5000

10000

15000

20000

25000

US

dolla

rs p

er c

apita

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 years of education

oecd greater asia latin america africa communist education effect

But not the whole gap!

Education explains part of the gap:

0

5000

10000

15000

20000

25000

US

dolla

rs p

er c

apita

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 years of education

oecd greater asia latin america africa communist education effect

But not the whole gap!

education deficit

other deficit

What else is involved:

• Bad geography?• Bad institutions?• Rapid population growth?• Bad culture?